Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mr Lester J Hendershot's magnetic generator.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GSM
    replied
    Originally posted by thx1138 View Post
    Why iron? Why not use a material which is less stable or possibly and iron core coated with a radioactive material? Or is the core just the conductor? If so, why use iron?
    Iron/ferrite is unique in that it has a wave motion to its magnetisation, and thus electron spin axis alignments within are quite different to those on the surface. The centre core can be polarised as like an Earth ground to the electron gyroscopes spinning on its surface.
    Professor Eric Laithwaite gives a demonstration of a large gyro wheel - YouTube
    Spinning matter either "as light as a feather" - or - as heavy as bedamned;
    with effective 'weight' dependent upon direction of axial rotation (polarity of impulse coil energisation) wrt ground (DC or slow AC magnetically polarised centre core); this inducing so called 'electron capture' + energetic release + Auger electron release, for positive electrical feedback plus output.

    Why iron - governments cannot ban iron/tin cans !
    If radioactive materials were legal (to order through the mail) then I would try to use them the same as Paul Brown did and (died in a strange car crash) Patented for the military, lighthouse and Satellite type 'batteries' you mention.

    Originally posted by thx1138 View Post
    I find interesting your take on the skin effect. During my explorations on the subject it occurred to me that most of the interesting effects occur at the boundaries of different things.
    Yes; at the edges of magnetic domains in iron/steel/stainless.
    Or tin plate boundaries on steel cans. Or tin plate boundaries on tinned copper wire instead of pure copper.

    Originally posted by thx1138 View Post
    RE the "Fe > Mn > Fe > Mn ..... " process, ask yourself if the Fe>Mn process is triggered by the Auger electron what triggers that Mn>Fe process.
    I suggested neutrinos; possibly nucleus imbalance during 'electron capture' invokes unavoidable neutrino interaction, much as with the decay of radioactive materials.

    Thank you for the links, much appreciated, will follow them shortly.

    Looking at your Tesla Radiant Energy paper, I have got as far as his "age 32" Patent, and I couldn't help but think that his drawing looked similar to this reality -
    Solar Wind Prediction
    (As of this date of upload, thank goodness the Sun missed again.)

    Back soon .................. Graham.
    Last edited by GSM; 10-05-2013, 10:50 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • thx1138
    replied
    Thermoelectric effect

    Originally posted by Dave45 View Post
    Although Im not a proponent of electrons from atoms, I tend to lean towards aether extraction, polarized ions.
    I thought this vid was interesting
    Joule Thief: DALM with AG-4 Battery Thermoelectric Effect - YouTube
    Most likely it is the thermoelectric effect. The thermocouple of a gas water heater works the same way. Electricity is generated at the interface between the copper and iron components when the thermocouple is heated. The thermocouple is an output only device. There is no other electrical connection. When the pilot light is lit and heating the thermocouple, the presence of the electricity at the controller tells it that it is OK to open the gas valve to light the main burner. If the pilot light is lit and the main burner won't light, the thermocouple has gone bad. I've had this occur and replacing the thermocouple fixed it. I don't know enough about battery construction to know if that is the case in this instance but I think so since there is an interface between the electrodes and electrolyte which are two different materials or the elctrodes could be copper plated with something else which could cause the thermoelectric effect.

    There are two other things happening in the video but I don't know enough about the JT circuit to know if they have an affect. Heat increases the resistance in the wire connection and holding the unisulated aligator clip increases the capacitance.

    Leave a comment:


  • thx1138
    replied
    Same destination via different routes

    It seems we are both moving towards the same conclusion but from different perspectives. In my case I grew weary of all the hype about Tesla's "radiant energy" and decided to go back through his works to see what he actually said rather than what other people said about what he said.

    Tesla's view of radiant energy changed over time and where he ended up was what we call today nuclear power. But not nuclear power to generate heat to spin a turbine but nuclear power to directly generate electricity. This method is used today for applications that require long term useage with little or no maintenance. The Russians use RTG's to power lighthouses around the Artic circle because they are hard to access. Another use is in space probes. The Voyager probe that recently left the solar system is power by a nuclear battery. It will operate at a power level sufficient to enable the probe operations for 40+ years with zero maintenance and zero down time. In the case of the space probes they are also engineered to produce heat because the probe needs heat to maintain other equipment on board.

    Tesla believed that if radioactive materials could be shielded from cosmic rays they would cease to be radioactive. In that scenario the cosmic rays are the catalyst for radioavtivity. There are different kinds of cosmic rays that are categorized by thier enegy level. Neutrinos are one such category. I tend to think Tesla was correct because he was right about so many things. That led me to thinking about why radioactive materials are radio active and the only explanation I found in current literature is that the atoms are "unstable". That led me to thinking why are they unstable if a body in motion remains in motion and a body at rest remains at rest unless affected by an outside force. Is the energy of the neutrino that outside force which tips the balance in radioactive materials so that they decay? Neutrinos rarely interact with matter but considering their abundance and constancy it seems likely to me that the answer to that question is yes. Keep in mind when thinking of Tesla's work that radioactive materials were not regulated by governments until the 1950's after they had been shown to produce atomic bombs. That may have been also what caused Dr. Moray's problems with MIB also and possibly Mr. Henershot's.
    Radioisotope Batteries Take a close look at the page titled "Adding a Dielectric". You'll see it again in the attached document.

    As all readers of this thread must have come to realise, I have been striving to understand which fundamental mechanisms might be capable of inducing a release of energy from iron atoms in Hubbard, Hendershot, Mace-Meyer, Don Smith, Kapanadze and Akula designs. ... Possibly also Floyd Sweets Magnetic Barium Ferrite Block VTA.
    Why iron? Why not use a material which is less stable or possibly and iron core coated with a radioactive material? Or is the core just the conductor? If so, why use iron?

    Don't let the radioactive materials spook you. I believe that fear instilled in us is part of the disinformation campaign. Low level radioactive materials can be aquired over the internet without a license. It's the highly processed materials that are dangerous. In fact there is debate now about the level of radiation that is dangerous. There seems to be a threshold level that was ignored when the standards were set.
    Toxicologist Says NAS Panel 'Misled the World' When Adopting Radiation Exposure Guidelines

    Materials: United Nuclear Images Scientific Instruments


    All of these gentlemen's equipments have in common a deeper core polarising field (either DC or low frequency AC), plus a pulsed field. I have suggested that this combination can be arranged to set up a surface spin wave which is gyroscopically capable of forcing electrons out of their atomic orbits to become involved with an electron (K) capture type sequence of events, and releasing energy as iron atoms become devolutionally transmutated into manganese.
    Another thing they have in common is that they haven't been successfully replicated that I know of.

    Another aspect, and one likely resonance related, is that the release of energy so far seen appears to have a repetitive pulsation quality, as if the energy release builds up to a peak and fades, only to be repeated following the next transient impulse excitation.
    That, I believe, is the essence of Tesla's "disruptive discharge". One pulse in a primary, immediately terminated, sets up a ringing pulse in a secondary and as the secondary rings down energy can be captured while no energy is being expended in the primary. That's why the fall time of the pulse in the primary is so important, hence the use of the spark gap. In Tesla's time the spark gap was the diode of the day and the magnetically quenched spark gap gave the fast pulse fall time needed. Another aspect of the spark gap is that it can be truly unidirectional while modern semiconductors always have some reverse leakage.

    I have felt as if I am musing for my own benefit here, for there has been very little feedback or opinion, yet I have continued because it is essential to understand the energy release mechanism involved *before* we can optimise equipments via which to generate it.
    I agree whole heartedly. That's why I went back to study the source as noted above.

    I have also come to believe that knowledgeable PTB are exerting peer review influence upon any 'scientific' papers which might inadvertently lead to anyone's discovery of the energy release mechanisms involved, and that not only does this information control relate to censorship, but to deliberate disinfo also. For this reason I have not allowed myself to be influenced by, or sucked into following the unexplained ideas hitherto suggested here by other forum members.
    I agree whole heartedly again. So does Harold Aspden because he was one of the many victims of that censorship. While it is easy to get side tracked, the flip side of that is you are missing other people's experiences. You really should look at his work. Here's one of the simple questions he poses: where does a "field" store its energy? You really owe it to yourself to take a look at his work. He is a theoretical physicist but don't let the math side track you. Read his texts for the underlying meaning.
    Ten Tutorial Lessons

    Hence when an electron impinges a nucleus, not only does the nucleus become modified with attendant energy release, but another electron is also emitted by that atom. That secondarily emitted electron is known as an *Auger Electron*, named after the man who discovered this effect about 75 years ago !
    Thank you for that. I had not heard of it either. It answers one of the things I've been looking at: what happens when you coat the insulated, elevated plate of Tesla's radiant energy patent with a low level radioactive material. As a test I was going to make such a plate and use an old radio vacuum tube that emits soft x-rays covered in a lead shield with a slit or hole in it to focus the x-rays on the plate. Tesla's patent says the plate is "amalgamated" but he didn't say what as in the amalgamation.

    Also note that the Auger electron process also is said to sometimes create photons. That may account for the glow observed in some experiments like in Stan Myer's energy cells. Stan Meyers Secret

    Could this relate to Tesla's "wheelwork of nature", whereupon the chain event is sustained by neutrino reversions within non-radioactive atomic nucleii, such that the Fe > Mn devolution is near instantly reversed with continuous bursts of Fe > Mn > Fe > Mn ..... except for one way Fe > Mn occasions where neutrino to nucleus impingement fails to occur, or transduction field overloading becomes disruptive ?
    At the time Tesla made his "wheelwork of nature" statement he was looking outward to the universe, not inward to subatomic processes. That was in 1892 and the atom was still believed at that time to be the indivisible minimum of matter.

    RE the "Fe > Mn > Fe > Mn ..... " process, ask yourself if the Fe>Mn process is triggered by the Auger electron what triggers that Mn>Fe process. I think Aspden's work can answer that question for you.

    I find interesting your take on the skin effect. During my explorations on the subject it occurred to me that most of the interesting effects occur at the boundaries of different things. A thermocouple in a water heater generates electricity at the boundary between the iron and copper components. I suspect this plays a larger part in John Bedini's work than most people realize - the coil cores are made of copper coated welding rods. The boundary between a plasma and the gas surrounding it has some interesting properties and the "pinch effect" has been shown to occur in lightning and in cosmological circumstances. See Hannes Alfven's work on the latter. alfven triumphs again and again

    I have attached what I have written up on Tesla's work on radiant energy. It still needs work. Hopefully it will trigger some thoughts for you.
    Last edited by thx1138; 01-03-2015, 02:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave45
    replied
    Although Im not a proponent of electrons from atoms, I tend to lean towards aether extraction, polarized ions.
    I thought this vid was interesting
    Joule Thief: DALM with AG-4 Battery Thermoelectric Effect - YouTube

    I do not mean to imply that electrons cannot be extracted from an atom I just dont think this is the only way to free energy, if atomic energy is the path one wants to follow then one should be working with thorium or other radioactive materials and a heating circuit such as the zvs induction heater.
    But I believe there is a safer, cleaner way via the aether, ionization of the magnetic field and am working towards this goal.
    Last edited by Dave45; 10-05-2013, 12:09 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    Yesterday evening (whilst painting indoors) I listened to a BBC Radio 4 story via the daughter of Leo Szilard, who on July 4 1934 filed the first patent application for the method of producing a nuclear chain reaction - nuclear explosion.

    The program explained how prior to 1938 the idea of fission related to firing a proton into a nucleus, and Leo realised that neutron initiation would be easier. Seems he went to America where another Patent was filed.

    BBC News - A Point of View: The man who dreamed of the atom bomb

    After the war Leo was not written about in nuclear history, though his co-worker Fermi became well known.

    Leo Szilard

    So either a proton or a neutron can split an atom and release energy, but then so too can an electron under the guise of 'electron capture' where the electron has been so excited or empowered to overcome orbital forces, this being either by photonic or electro-magneto-gravitationally induced impact !

    Though woe would betide any grant funded scientist who publishes such information,
    and so the research WE fund via thousands of extremely well paid scientist remains secreted from our benefit !!!!!


    Cheers ................ Graham.
    Last edited by GSM; 10-05-2013, 08:47 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Smith View Post
    Whom can a person involved in disinfo trust? Who would want to live that way?
    Thank you for your comment Bob.
    Sadly our present world is based upon disinfo, and an associated fear for not believing disinfo "just in case" of not receiving 'leadership' controlled confirmational benefits.
    Media and an induced "just in case" mindset has become majority pervasive, and it is ruining today's World through over-riding the true spirit that every indivudual should hold dear within their hearts and not allow to be influenced by the induction of fear and greed via an 'expertly informed' peer group.

    If anyone wishes to understand the original pre-mainstream Christian, pre-mainstream Islam etc. teachings which were removed from public circulation in exactly same way that 'free'-energy texts have been hidden, might I suggest you read the original teachings of The Twelve as recorded in the Didache of the original Sinai Bible.
    The translation is only recent, published 2010, and I immediately purchased a copy, but there has already been a preponderance of 'modern' interpretation and commentary intentionally published to fit in with current disinfo !
    Ah - just found a link - The Didache - The Complete Text
    Warning - even the opening paragraph links with disinfo.
    This text was/is 'free' standing, and from a time when communities made their own, and not any 'Church' organisation dictated, leadership choices. Only those who read it can come to their own conclusion about what is being religiously inculcated today !


    When writing about aluminium well over 100 years ago Tesla wrote -
    If the molecules are tilted one way then the body is magnetic, if they are tilted the other way the body is non-magnetic.
    He also wrote about using copper conductors to make superior transformers without requiring iron (ferrous) cores at all.

    I found that it is the solidity of ferrous cores which destroys their usefulness through damping surface electron alignment possibilities in a most significant way.

    Last year in the Bob Smith thread I believe it was member kdken who illustrated the identical sparking per turn of his long air spaced copper coils. This arose only at one frequency - a resonant tuning - but what was really being tuned was not a 'flow' of electrons, nor their simplistic magnetic field reversal, but their three dimensional precessional alignments at the skin suface of the coil wire. This was of surface atom electrons synchronously pirouetting over inner purely longitudinal conduction aligned wire atom orbits - energies suddenly in a resonantly induced three dimensional alignment transformation whereupon surface charge flow itself took on a separate identity.

    At one frequency the precession (not field alternation) was generating what appeared to be an electron avalanche field; was this due to Auger electrons, and were copper atoms momentarily spin vortexing into nickel with an energy release which was not otherwise being collected ?

    As suggested a possibility in my last post, was the all pervasive ambient neutrino flux (not Aether) involved in resetting the nickel back to copper by way of continuous low level change, except for when the rate of excitation exceeded the ambient provision of neutrinos where copper nucleii did irreversibly remain nickel?

    Is this a way in which Akula's copper wire could have become attracted by a magnet ?

    Also, is there thus some base level of neutrino flux determined rate of conversion which can be sustained indefiniteley before any equipment might overheat and become irreversibly damaged (TH Moray), whereby all we need concern ourselves in relation to reliability is a physical scale, much as over-run standby generators won't last long if overloaded ?

    No matter what Bob, you have highlighted from my writing that which I believe is essential regarding our quest for understanding field induced activities at the surface of a Hendershot sleeve core, and why aluminium foil was part of an energised feedback loop collecting and re-charging a magnetic 'buzzer' to release its next magnetic reversal impulse. Nowadays we do not have hands-on dexterities in relation to the construction and tuning of magnetic pulse generators, but then with today's solid state pulsing alternatives we do not need them, nor especially a spark gap either. So whether or not my untrained hypotheses relating to induced electron spin axis vortexing and Auger electron avalanche waves 'fueled' by 'neutrino reversion' are correct or not, I feel that I do have enough information upon which to found Hendershot sleeve core based experiments.

    As a final note for now.
    There are likely many senior members here who like myself constructed early TRF AM broadcast receivers and used regenarative techniques to increase selectivity and 'sensitivity'. Straightforward tuning coils, whether having a core or not, tended to have a useful resonant Q of ~100, whereafter regeneration could (if not long term stabily) be arranged to boost that up to ~1000 (TH Moray) but not necessarily in a manner which would also improve the s.n.r. due to circuit noise also being a part of the feedback.
    Ferrite rod antennas typically have a working Q of 100 too, however a ferrite sleeve antenna can have a natural Q of 1000 using exactly the same rods as used in a Q=100 rod antenna, and this entirely passively !
    Where could that take us in the realm of induced vortexion with tuned positive feedback - as Hendershot did ?

    This antenna is a working proof that it is the precessionary alignment of electron orbits at the surface of matter which is (also known via the skin effect) most important in relation to electromagnetic energy field concentration and circuit related conversion.

    Cheers ................. Graham.
    Last edited by GSM; 10-04-2013, 09:52 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Smith
    replied
    Originally posted by GSM View Post
    All of these gentlemen's equipments have in common a deeper core polarising field (either DC or low frequency AC), plus a pulsed field. I have suggested that this combination can be arranged to set up a surface spin wave which is gyroscopically capable of forcing electrons out of their atomic orbits to become involved with an electron (K) capture type sequence of events, and releasing energy as iron atoms become devolutionally transmutated into manganese.

    Another aspect, and one likely resonance related, is that the release of energy so far seen appears to have a repetitive pulsation quality, as if the energy release builds up to a peak and fades, only to be repeated following the next transient impulse excitation.

    I have felt as if I am musing for my own benefit here, for there has been very little feedback or opinion, yet I have continued because it is essential to understand the energy release mechanism involved *before* we can optimise equipments via which to generate it.
    Graham, I can only speak for myself here. I'm actively following your posts, and once I got out of the electron-moving-along-a-wire box and considered electrical charge as a precession wave of atomic axial alignment... new and interesting possibilities, explanations seem to be opening up. I can follow, and continue to follow with interest, connecting dots as read other threads on this and other sites. I am sure I'm not alone.

    It seems to me that despite the disinfo work in this area, progress is being made. Truth, by its very nature tends toward prevailing. It tends toward coalescence and unity of purpose toward the good, and we are moving in this direction. Truth's obfuscation takes a tremendous amount of ongoing energy. Its (obfuscation of truth's) very nature is entropic and dissipative, and tends toward confusion and abandonment of allegiance. What of lasting value is to be gained from lies? It is tiresome to shore up lies, because they tend toward disunity, fragmentation and find unity only in fear, greed and the false allurements of a kind of power that isolates and leaves one imprisoned in fear and mistrust. Whom can a person involved in disinfo trust? Who would want to live that way? Truth, on the other hand tends toward self-propagation by its very nature. One word, spoken at the right time in truth can cut through a mountain of lies. Truth spoken to power always wins in the end, despite appearences otherwise. We are getting there, and your part is appreciated.
    Bob

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    As all readers of this thread must have come to realise, I have been striving to understand which fundamental mechanisms might be capable of inducing a release of energy from iron atoms in Hubbard, Hendershot, Mace-Meyer, Don Smith, Kapanadze and Akula designs. Tesla very likely developed a similar equipment which was secreted away by TPTB in exchange for the lifetime payment for his hotel residence and keep. Possibly also Floyd Sweets Magnetic Barium Ferrite Block VTA.

    All of these gentlemen's equipments have in common a deeper core polarising field (either DC or low frequency AC), plus a pulsed field. I have suggested that this combination can be arranged to set up a surface spin wave which is gyroscopically capable of forcing electrons out of their atomic orbits to become involved with an electron (K) capture type sequence of events, and releasing energy as iron atoms become devolutionally transmutated into manganese.

    Another aspect, and one likely resonance related, is that the release of energy so far seen appears to have a repetitive pulsation quality, as if the energy release builds up to a peak and fades, only to be repeated following the next transient impulse excitation.

    I have felt as if I am musing for my own benefit here, for there has been very little feedback or opinion, yet I have continued because it is essential to understand the energy release mechanism involved *before* we can optimise equipments via which to generate it.

    I have also come to believe that knowledgeable PTB are exerting peer review influence upon any 'scientific' papers which might inadvertently lead to anyone's discovery of the energy release mechanisms involved, and that not only does this information control relate to censorship, but to deliberate disinfo also. For this reason I have not allowed myself to be influenced by, or sucked into following the unexplained ideas hitherto suggested here by other forum members.

    Given that any release of energy from iron via the so called electron capture effect relates to the modification of atomic nucleii, and I am not educated or trained in these matters, my further readings have revealed a related phenomenon used for X-ray and medical purposes previously unknown to me; this being the observation of additionally energised near simultaneous electron releases as a direct consequence of the so called electron capture event.

    Hence when an electron impinges a nucleus, not only does the nucleus become modified with attendant energy release, but another electron is also emitted by that atom. That secondarily emitted electron is known as an *Auger Electron*, named after the man who discovered this effect about 75 years ago !

    These types of electrons were discovered 10 years before I was born, and yet I had never heard of them before yesterday. Why are we not freely educated about these electrons ?

    Auger electron release turns out to be a surface only effect, thus arising exactly where I have suggested that transient field induced electron axis spin vortexes induce abnormal forces upon electrons.

    So, just as in nuclear fission where neutrons are the catalysing particle, there could be an externally energised electron fission wave event related to energy release from progressive electron impacts upon nucleii plus electron emission as is necessary to maintain an energy releasing field induced via a domain vortexion event, and this because where an Auger electron is magnetically induced to run in the same direction as the first electron a quantum race of electron waves can start !

    Could this relate to Tesla's "wheelwork of nature", whereupon the chain event is sustained by neutrino reversions within non-radioactive atomic nucleii, such that the Fe > Mn devolution is near instantly reversed with continuous bursts of Fe > Mn > Fe > Mn ..... except for one way Fe > Mn occasions where neutrino to nucleus impingement fails to occur, or transduction field overloading becomes disruptive ?

    Cheers ........... Graham.
    Last edited by GSM; 10-03-2013, 10:34 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    Hendershot capacitor.

    Further to my last post relating to possible Beta/charge release by the ferrous cores of the generator, I just pulled out some photographs from an old hard-drive.

    This is of the left "capacitor core" (Hendershot's own description) on Art Aho's device, whereafter the capacitor circuit had been redrawn by Crusty in my link last year illustrating a three element component, but was it three foils, and if yes what was their relationship with the central core ?

    http://ccs.infospace.com/ClickHandle...8EAF87C2B5553E

    Look where the alligator clip is.
    I remember thinking last year that Lester must have somehow managed to remove the foil from the capacitor with its tag connection intact, for aluminium foil could not bear the weight of an alligator clip as photographed.

    But look where the tag goes to

    Is that not directly to the ferrous cylinder core itself ?
    Maybe even a tin-plate tag soldered to it ?

    A core that would develop a usable charge with respect to an aluminium foil collector-capacitor overwind if magnetically induced electron axis spin waves induce elemental devolution in the ferrous core as I have suggested.

    A core that would be a source of serious electric shock if the alligator clip came off or made poor contact as Lester tried to tune the assembly as shown in one photograph - by hand squeezing it !

    We'll get one of these things flying yet !

    Cheers ........... Graham
    Attached Files
    Last edited by GSM; 10-02-2013, 03:21 PM. Reason: add link

    Leave a comment:


  • thx1138
    replied
    Hendershot, Aspden, and Tesla

    Please understand I'm just a layman that has been looking at these things for about 2 1/2 years now. These are some of my thoughts.

    Originally posted by GSM View Post
    Hence I have suggested that the Hendershot core undergoes elemental devolution with fundamental energy release.
    What nature of energy release is this though, merely of electrons, 'electron capture' or Beta emission.?
    Or could it be that the "underworld aether", as Aspden puts it, absorbs and stores the energy to be released later as part of the transition back to equilibrium so that no energy release occurs in the "overworld" (my term) that we observe?

    Thus I firmly believe that some information was held back from both the publication notes and the formal Patent filing in relation to a grounding or the taking of useful electrical output from the central ferrous sleeve in which this fundamental non-radioactive nuclear activity is being induced to occur.
    Or the information being held back is the relationship to the aether, which at that time would be a definite plus so as to not have scientists of the day dismissing the project without even looking at it.

    The thing here that I am left wondering about relates to there being only two capacitor connections with L4s of the circuit, yet illustrations show three capacitor foils. Yes the longer foil could be merely have been a series connection electrode, but was it left disconnected ?
    What strikes me about the elongated part of the capacitor is how it relates to Aspden's 3 concentric plate capacitor. In determining how to build Aspden's device I worked a little on the dimensions of the cylinders and, referring to Lowenstein's work on capacitances, the only way I see of having concentric cylinders with the same capacitance is to extend the inner cylinders' lengths so that it has the same surface area of the outer cylinder. So the larger the differences in diameter, the greater the required length of the inner cylinder. And I may be off base here but I see the same kind of arrangement in Tesla's US patent 1,119,732 (Wardenclyffe) with coils A, B, AND C being concentric and coil B protruding a short distance into coils A and B. In that patent Tesla states, "The coil B is wound on a frame or drum D' of insulating material, with its turns close together. I have discovered that when so wound the effect of the small radius of curvature of the wire itself is overcome and the coil behaves as a conductor of large radius of curvature, corresponding to that of the drum.", i.e. the coil acts as a cylinder the size of the drum.


    And so I ask myself whether two complete assemblies remain essential to the operation of a Hendershot device and I have two answers. If a charge field reflecting magnetic buzzer is to be the energising source - yes; however if modern electronic circuit energisation methods are to be used then I think that only one well set up core should be essential, as per Kapanadze.
    Consider Dr. Aspden's diagram of an experimental device where there are two capacitors made of concentric plates and the capacitors are arranged at an angle of 60 degrees to each other. Does geometry play a part in the arrangement of Hendershot's device? If so, that could be a part of the answer for two assemblies.

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    House painting postponed due to rain.

    Originally posted by thx1138 View Post
    Not sure if you've seen the work of Harold Aspden
    It is basically this: the electron is not a fundamental particle but it is derived from something even more fundamental that he calls the aether.
    Thanks thx1138.

    I cannot say that Harold is wrong, but the model in my mind relating to magnetism being the alignment of electron orbit spin axes directly led to my successful hands-on inception and optimisation of the ferrite sleeve antenna.
    Concept before construction.

    Here the electron orbit was viewed as being in a self powered gyroscopic relationship with the parent atomic nucleus, and magnetic induction causing electrons to axially precess into alignment; ie. an axial rotation and not just an instantaneous flip directly from one spin alignment to another.

    Thus whilst the coil winding induced precessionary alignments of electron orbits is speedy at a ferric surface, the same situation cannot arise at deeper sited ferrite electron orbits because these remain more closely coupled with the body of neighbouring alignment. The deeper the field induction required within a material the longer the induction field alignment precession wave takes to penetrate.
    And it is the same in reverse.
    A deeper field induced within a core takes longer to fully collapse outwards than does that on the surface of a core, whether that field be generated by current flow or magnetic induction.

    Thus a DC or slow AC induction, as with the short circuit turn Hendershot sleeve, can create an inner field bias about which a surface orbiting electron can be transient magnetic field induced to precess, not unlike a little gyroscope, and this especially so if a single current induced transient simultaneously set up opposing magnetic fields via oppositely connected end of sleeve core windings. The centre field thus cannot fail to change direction in a compression region, and thereby induce highly energetic surface domain spins whereby electron axis rotations normal to their spin orbits forces electrons completely out of base atomic relationships in exactly the same way as would whirling around an already spinning gyroscope in Earth gravity.

    Hence I have suggested that the Hendershot core undergoes elemental devolution with fundamental energy release.
    What nature of energy release is this though, merely of electrons, 'electron capture' or Beta emission.?

    An unavoidable outcome of Beta release is the generation and development of an electric charge by the remaining matter, which in this case is the Hendershot sleeve core, and this charge must develop with respect to emission recipients, whether these be near or far.
    Thus without any electrical connection being made to the ferrous sleeve cores within a Hendershot generator they cannot fail to build up a substantial charge with respect to the nearest conductor - the aluminium capacitor.

    This I why I wanted to check out the photographs of the Hendershot generator for there is no mention of any connection to the core sleeve in this device, and yet without same a fatal shock voltage would build up on that sleeve until either the electron precession was overcome, or there was a break down of the insulating material between the ferrous core and the aluminium capacitor.

    Thus I firmly believe that some information was held back from both the publication notes and the formal Patent filing in relation to a grounding or the taking of useful electrical output from the central ferrous sleeve in which this fundamental non-radioactive nuclear activity is being induced to occur.

    If a beta particle impacts an atom of aluminium then the aluminium matter develops a charge, so was the capacitor exactly as described in Hendershots drawings, or could a differential charge have developed and been used in some way. Maybe different arrangements were tested and not all revealed ?

    The thing here that I am left wondering about relates to there being only two capacitor connections with the coil 'D' windings of the circuit, yet illustrations show three capacitor foils. Yes the longer foil could be merely have been a series connection electrode, but was it left disconnected ? Had there even been some kind of energetic pulse delay line effect integral with tuning ?

    Were there two capacitor arrangements in one with the Hendershot generator ? The two short foils used primarily for tuning, but a ferrous core to long aluminium foil energy generating positive feedback loop capacitor not indicated on the drawings and needing additional external wire links before operation could commence ?

    Another aspect in relation to development would relate to the establishment of coil winding 'D' type tuning via fixed plus adjustable capacitors. Could this simplify aluminium foil capacitor overwind arrangements to just one concentric electrode around the sleeve core, or might transduction be accomplished by another separate coil winding in place of the foil, say tinned and stranded copper wire ?

    One aspect I do not see arising is an effect related to magnetically induced electron/ atomic alignments within the hand made capacitor dielectric because the induced magnetic field was virtually centre node reflecting with respect to both core and capacitor ends.

    And so I ask myself whether two complete assemblies remain essential to the operation of a Hendershot device and I have two answers. If a charge field reflecting magnetic buzzer is to be the energising source - yes; however if modern electronic circuit energisation methods are to be used then I think that only one well set up core should be essential, as per Kapanadze.


    Cheers ............. Graham.
    Last edited by GSM; 10-02-2013, 01:47 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • thx1138
    replied
    Unified physics

    Not sure if you've seen the work of Harold Aspden but he spent 50+ years on a related topic that seems, to my mind, to unify physics but then I'm no scientist. The math is over my head but I still get the gist of what he is saying. It is basically this: the electron is not a fundamental particle but it is derived from something even more fundamental that he calls the aether. There is a lot written and supposed abotu the aether but after 2 1/2 years looking at this stuff his is the clearest explanation to me.

    In 50+ years he did a lot of work so there is a lot to digest but he has 10 lessons that explain the fundamentals of it. these lessons are fairly far down into his work but it is a good starting point.
    Tutorial Lessons

    And here is a link to the top level of his site.
    Energy Science

    Edit: A new form of matter - light molecules (photon molecules) - photons DO have mass which changes everything. Actually, I guess it doesn't really change anything but people's perspectives.
    Scientists Create Never-Before-Seen Form of Matter
    Last edited by thx1138; 10-01-2013, 12:18 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ewizard
    replied
    Originally posted by GSM View Post
    I'm getting real fed up with the situation here.
    Sometimes I am able to error correct a post, sometimes not.

    With the last one above as I write this, yet again I'm reduced to copy-paste into desktop wordpad, correct it, and then again copy-paste to repost on the forum.
    As below for Sunday 22nd Sept, when completed.
    Not sure if you've seen this before but Aaron told me you have to go to the 'Advanced' tab to be able to edit a post successfully 100% of the time otherwise it's hit and miss. (click Edit then click 'Go Advanced')

    Leave a comment:


  • a.king21
    replied
    Gsm

    I agree - it's not possible to have internet security. BUT BUT BUT... we don't have to pay the b.....ards to spy on us.
    By using Google and hotmail they dump ads on you which gives them money.
    By using startpage they don't get a cent from you. You could also go the whole two finger route and use yandex.com for both browsing and email. It's a Russian operation. Oh how times have changed.

    Leave a comment:


  • GSM
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Smith View Post
    Graham,

    Hope the painting's going well.
    Bob
    Painting outside - slow because of weather.
    Painting inside instead.
    Where painting = thinking !

    There must be something we have never been informed about relating to this generator and it must relate to the core-cap assembly, and the unclear description of external connections reported as being necessary to bring this device into operation or turn it off.
    It might even have something to do with Lester's massive electric shock, possible if attempting demonstration under conditions of observational distractions.

    I must now study all existing photographs, though note that an excellent link to some I posted in June of last year no longer works.

    Cheers .............. Graham.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X